Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Terromo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Speedy deleted by User:Anthony.bradbury, non-admin closure. Have a happy holiday. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 22:00, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Terromo

Terromo (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

A fantasy Hoax. (also see below and article talk page) Nehwyn (talk) 18:51, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete Talk page suggests author has secondary motive for keeping the page (for the next 24hrs only). Found no secondary references to this subject. Padillah (talk) 19:15, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes, that's mysterious. I just wish there were some way for the article to disappear for the next 24h and then resume the deletion process.  :) --Nehwyn (talk) 19:21, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
We could always CSD it. I don't see a reason to keep it now. I thought it was just my lackluster research methods but if the author doesn't even have a reason for it then let's make it go "bye-bye" Padillah (talk) 19:32, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Well, we tried that once already and was denied. --Nehwyn (talk) 19:34, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
  • On further thought, the fact that the history section stated that the Earth itself raised mountains around the village as a protecting gift places this in the realm of fantasy. And an unsourced fantasy falls within the realm of WP:MADEUP in Wikipedia. The author's insistence that the article be deleted only after 24h is a strong suspect of some secondary gain from it; I've therefore taken the liberty of reducing the article to a short statement for now. Should anyone have sources for the rest, feel free to reinsert statements once you source them. --Nehwyn (talk) 19:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom and above. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 20:19, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - Just wondering, but why is this nominated for both speedy deletion and AfD at the same time?
  • Covering the bases, looks like. Delete as unsourced and unverifiable. Tony Fox (arf!) 21:06, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.